Sunday, 6 April 2008
With random spiritual entity, currently fashionable new age amorphous nullity, adopted statement or whatever on our side.
Two Westerners in the year 2050, attempting to avoid causing offence to Muslims.
Request of the week from Wednesday 15 August 2007, updated.
During World War ll on the eve of D-Day, the Allied led invasion plan for the liberation of Europe and for the primary destruction of Hitler’s forces, Democrat President Franklin D. Roosevelt made a six hour national radio broadcast to the troops, the people of America and the world.
It was a prayer that was couched inseparably in many references to and with a central unwavering belief in ‘God Almighty’, Christianity and Nation. It spoke deeply and passionately for the success of the extremely perilous task at hand and for the well being and complete victory of the Allied armies against the Axis forces of Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy and Imperial Japan.
The leader of the Free French Forces relayed to the American Supreme Commander Dwight D. Eisenhower that, “This is war and people die in war. We would accept twice the casualties if it means liberation”. The German Commander in Occupied France, Field Marshall Rommel said that the Allies had killed more French people than the Germans and that this was a high price to pay.
In 1944, no activists went to Paris, tying themselves to the Eiffel Tower, wearing T-shirts and banners proclaiming ‘Not in our name’. There were no mass protests after FDR’s historic broadcast that the Christian Right had now taken over the Democratic Party and were manipulating policy for their own evil means. There was no protest regarding the Allied race to secure oil fields in the Middle East and North Africa for the essential fuels and other myriad products needed to maintain the momentum of the war effort in the no alternative to complete victory.
There was no outcry when Dwight declared that the Allied invasion of France was part of “A great Crusade”. And that is because one cannot seperate Judeo Christianity from the Western Canon, our culture, our history and who we have been, who we are and who we will be. The greatest threat to Islamism and Communism/Socialism is Christianity.
You cannot defeat the super nihilistic void and vortex of Islam and so on, with the vacuum of "progressive" Liberal secularism or a variant. It must be allied, supported and with the basis of the true and great faith. And that's Christianity, folks, whatever way ya wanna deal it. Try a few PC magic tricks and shadow shows on a group of screeching Islamist loons, see how they go. Good luck. Ya gonna need it. "I'll tell you this..."
Such fashionable ideology will neither appeal to a mortal enemy, nor defeat them. To destroy Islamofascism one needs Christianity and superior firepower! There is an alternative. No, really. Laying down and being murdered by far more than 91 million Jihadists.
Now much of the ‘Big One’ generation was without the time and much inclination, for the decadent luxury of endlessly self complicating reveries and abstractions. Their lives were about well, staying alive. Unlike today, the war time populace were acutely aware of whom the real threat was; what their enemy’s goals were and what would happen to the world and everything of hard won human value, if the extreme ideology of Nazism and the rest of the “Axis” forces of Imperial Japan and Fascist Italy were successful. This is almost entirely the opposite of the situation today.
Now of course, many people before the war began, as well as during and after, were bizarrely not realistic at all about Fascism, nor supportive of their own governments, and by default both their own and our survival. Much of the UK Left were deeply deluded and bankrupted with appeasement and more. Their profoundly dishonest, suicidal ideological positions even included support for Nazism and Stalinism. Here's a great interview with Jonah Goldberg on his great book "[Left] Liberal Fascism'.
I suggest reading among other things, 'What's Left? How Liberals lost their way' by Nick Cohen. Good old Saint Nick shows how history is repeating itself with the topsy turvy and wilful madness of much of Left Liberalism today.
They have supported Saddam and other freaks by among other things; wanting to leave him and his rapist paedophile sons in place, because for the Left and Liberal, the West is never pure enough to be allowed to act. The Left among others, also aid Islamists by their own massive and continuous denial of the very harsh fact of Islamic terrorism. But then most of the same folks with their no sense of any judgement at all, have always, always cheered and supported or grooved on the image of Che the child killer Guevara, El Pig Castro and so on...
One of the great things about living in the secular West is you don’t have to have a religious faith if you don’t want to. The bad thing is that sometimes, you just don’t have much faith in anything, which is where all Leftist roads eventually lead, to the rejection of one thing after another until there is nothing left but the firing squad and the endless speeches that go with it.
Islamists know who they are, what they believe, what they are doing, what they will achieve, as well as how and why. They are profoundly more determined than the endlessly abstracting and frivolous among us who are simply, not serious at all.
At what point exactly would the Left and many others be willing to say that we are under threat and attack? At what point will we see the difference between imperfect actions and perfectly useless talk?
At what point will some folks research enough or at all, to see that Islamism has its own goals, history, unwavering beliefs and an ultimate goal that requires nothing from us but weakness, failure, division and a lack of clarity regards our own submission and deaths? This will happen no matter how ‘tolerant’ we are. Of course, it's not all fun and laughter.
There is a war with Islamism now whether we want one or not. Islamists have no authentic demands beyond the expedient and diversionary, and nothing to negotiate but our complete surrender in ‘Dhimmitude’ and mass execution. In short my dear sports, we are in mortal danger. We must sharpen our focus and away from the currently relentless fashion for the bog of distraction on issues, that when in contrast to the current & real facts of our own deaths, are peripheral and mere details.
I wonder at what point the majority of the Western sphere will get serious about its own survival. I wonder, wonder I do. Like Dr Johnsons thought of imminent hanging focusing the mind, our thoughts and actions should concentrate on our collective beheading courtesy of Global Islamism.
For the Left, the Liberal and the Radical, there is not only no war, no terrorism and nothing worth dying for, but there is entirely no enemy. That is for them, outside of Western governments.
To admit to anything serious at hand that is not the allegedly direct result of George Bush and the hyperbole drenched sins of the West, would require leaving the Left’s ‘Look at me, ain’t I the good guy and superior to you?’ attitude behind. It would mean being discriminating enough to be able to discriminate between good and evil, life and death, right and wrong, victory and defeat.
It would require the ability to tell the difference between a naturally imperfect human present and an absurd, inhuman and impossible future fantasy. Or having the clarity and realism to judge between; an enormously successful Democratic, open, progressive, flexible, civil and free West and a deeply failed, oppressive, closed, messianic, parasitic, theocratic, dictatorial, rigid, dysfunctional Middle East and its global franchises.
But for those that believe that it’s all relative and that life can be seen as an amorphous, malleable perspective simply by saying so, well, nothing but nothing will catch the attention of your incurious, relentless nihilism and moral vanity.
Evan Sayet, comedian, former Left, Liberal and Radical, now speaker and author of ‘How Modern Liberals think’, has spoken how the Left believes that “being indiscriminate is a moral imperative”. How they believe that “rational and moral thought is an act of bigotry. To eliminate discrimination the Left choose to be utterly indiscriminate".
Says Sayet, “Discrimination, the ability to choose the better option from evidence is the essence of rational thought”. In part that is why to the Left, there is no difference between Blair, Bush, Howard and Hitler, or to quote a common and predictable Leftist placard, “Bush = Hitler” ad nauseum. In fact in Leftism’s profound bankruptcy, Saddam is often better than Bush.
Beyond their current default positions, Left/Liberalism as it often is today, rejects the desire to be right about anything, as they see all success especially Western success, as failure.
Any judgement, no matter what the evidence and facts, are usually irrelevant and glibly dismissed with no curiosity or scepticism at all. Mostly only the identical conclusions are allowed, no matter how absurd the hyperbole. Paradoxically these views can fashionably change in an instant. Hence, the need in various psycho states to persecute and murder those who have ‘misunderstood’ the Revolution if only by default.
"Gee, sorry comrade. Nobody informed me who was today’s enemy and what was tomorrow’s slogan!"
Capitalist Democracies can only ever be seen by the Leftist as successful because somebody was apparently cheated. Nothing is ever good enough and they supply no answers beyond failed, unworkable and unproven fantasies. According to John Ray M.A & Ph. D at dissectleft, the Leftist has an obsession with radical change for its own sake, no matter how destructive, impractical or seemingly insane, just like Mao, Che and Pol Pot et al.
That’s how you get the many variations on the deeply juvenile and stupid “Smash Capitalism!” or smash whatever. Hardly much of a plan for anything in reality as even demolition companies plan ahead.
For such personalities, the deeper analysis and detail is simply not where the drama is. It’s much easier to have a violent demonstration or talk in platitudes and dated rhetoric about ‘the people’ for whom they have no real interest in beyond as a cipher for their meaningless political abstractions. Even going up into the hills with guns is easier than the slow, hard work of design, creativity, planning, consensus and testing that is absolutely required for real progress.
Julie Burchill has defined the anti-Iraq war protesters as “the silly led by the sinister". The silly often includes many otherwise good people. Burchill continues how the trouble with many good people, is that they cannot comprehend or conceive of how wicked and bad some people can be.
Regards Islamism, Saddam, Cuba, North Korea etc, etc, they often believe it’s either exaggerated, mostly fictional, entirely made up, or it's all merely the result of Western provocations. This way, they avoid any task that requires any real analysis of actual motive and responsibility. It's just all the West's fault!
Strangely, the same people can often unblinkingly accept the most absurd attributions regards their own leaders and culture.
When Ronald Reagan called the Soviets the "Evil Empire", he was exactly and empirically right. Just as George Bush was precisely correct in naming Saddams Iraq, North Korea and Iran, an "Axis of Evil". Anyone unable or unwilling to see this as a demonstratable series of facts, is incapable of any clear and rational thought whenever and wherever it counts. Thus they are not just useless, but useful idiot friends of our very real enemies.
Evan Sayet eloquently speaks of the Left eagerly tearing down what is right and good and elevating the wrong and evil. Bringing low the behaviour that leads to success and promoting that which leads to failure.
This is why the Left often uniformally sides with evil as in Saddam, Fidel and Che in Cuba, Islamists, Stalin and the Soviets, Red China in the 1960’s, North Vietnam, Communism and Socialism in general, African Nationalist Dictators, even Hitler in the 1930’s, as well as instigating violent demonstrations and riots etc. It’s why the Left mostly promotes drug use, promiscuity, ever bigger government control and many other dubious and perfectly insane non-ideas.
In his book ‘What’s Left?’, author and columnist Nick Cohen, speaks of the Left’s “wasteland of moral relativism” and how Richard Dawkins 'couldn't see beyond Bush to an Iraq that was being pulverised by Islamists.
In a letter to the press just after the war [began] he summed up the liberals' raging indifference when he [Dawkins]gloated, "Now Bush is begging the United Nations to help clean up the mess he created in Iraq, there is a temptation to tell him to get lost. It is a temptation to which I hope the United Nations will succumb. US armed forces are 'overstretched', and that is exactly how they should be."
In the moral vacuum of his posturing, Richard Dawkins displays not even the trace of any sympathy for the Iraqi people, especially one that is capable of overriding his arrogant and irrational hatred for the leader of a Western Democracy.
Cohen shows how the “nihilist mentality” from universities and anti-globalisation is now mainstream. “There was the same commitment-phobia: the leaders of the anti-war marches in Britain who saluted Saddam or mused about executing apostates were the exception. Most who marched behind them just grew impatient if you asked which Iraqis they were supporting and what type of Iraq they wanted to see. The idea that liberalism imposed the obligation to support others who shared liberal values was as beyond most liberals as it was beyond most of those who called themselves socialists".
Nick Cohen has shown clearly that Liberals are now, the appeasers of hate. An extract from his book ‘What’s Left? How the Liberals lost their way’.
"WWII was often played by ear, filled with failure, mistakes, heartbreak and over sixty million dead and cost billions of dollars. But like today, there was an enemy, there was a war and this was weighed against the alternative of utter defeat and what would have been the beginning of a deep and terrible darkness for the whole world. It was like Islamism now; the abyss.
Much of the less complicated and non post modern generation that lived, fought, loved, hated and died through the 1940’s, instinctively and clearly saw the realities of life and death before them and the stark, harsh choices they represented. We have no Churchill to call the enemy without and within exactly what they are and as clearly.
So many are so distracted by their peripheral delusions, that we are like a man entering a street fight with his house ajar and with those that would wish him ill in his home already. God help us all".